Should 'gender' rather than 'sex' be prioritised in the workplace?

[WeeBisom]

I've just read an article by Robin White (www.internationalemploymentlawyer.com/news/rationalising-sex-and-gender-terms-workplace) arguing that gender, rather than sex, should be the prioritised characteristic in the context of the workplace. I have some problems with this, and wondered what other people think.

Robin defines sex as a 'physiological characteristic', and gender as 'the social norms or forms associated with males or females.' Robin then goes on to say that in the workplace, sex is not important. Rather, gender is. But sex does take primacy in the context of marriage, and medical care.

The reason for this is because when you get a job, the employer does not get you to prove your sex by testing your chromosomes or checking your genitals. So the term 'sex' in the equality act must refer to something other than biological sex when it comes to workplace discrimination, because employers simply aren't interested in your junk.
White then argues that social norms like separate toilets, sleeping accommodation and changing facilities are based on gender, not sex. And the gender pay gap is also to do with gender, not sex. White concludes "sex may mean different things in the registrars office, the gp surgery and the workplace. And in the workplace we may conclude that when we say sex we really mean gender."

Here are my issues with this.

1. The Equality act 2010 expressly defines 'woman' as a member of the female sex. It doesn't mention gender. So there is no reason to import the term 'gender' into the equality act. The Gender Recognition act 2004 uses sex and gender interchangeably, but that is no reason to apply this to the equality act.

2. The claim about the employer not testing your chromosomes is a straw man. The doctor or wedding registrar doesn't test chromosomes or inspect genitals either.In fact, there is no context where you have to prove your biological sex by getting a chromosome test. Sex doesn't need to be verified with an invasive test...it can be verified by looking at birth certificates (or just looking at the person.)

3. Robin is incorrect to say that separate toilets, separate changing facilities etc are differences imposed based on 'gender'. The real reason we have separate facilities is to protect female people (who are oppressed by male people) from sexual violence, and the male gaze. It is implausible to suggest that we segregate people based on how feminine or masculine they are. The true reason is sex based, and due to sex based oppression.
   Similarly, Robin's explanation of the gender pay gap is very strange. Why would socially feminine people be paid less than masculine people? The gender pay gap only makes sense when you realise that women are penalised for having babies or the assumption they will have babies...all linked to their sex.

As far as I can see, there is no reason at all to prioritise gender in the workplace over sex. Any thoughts about this?

Robin Moira White has often been wrong when it comes to the EA2010.

As a transwoman there is an inherent bias, one that completely and utterly ignores the safety and dignity of women.

A simple no thanks to that idea.

Of course Robin would say that. I'm saying No.

Is Robin White a man or a woman? I can't imagine a woman thinking that women have been discriminated against in the work place because of gender rather than our sex.

From pp is robin tw?

Hell no, sex is physical reality, like race. gender is a choice, it how you choose to present yourself.

Bollocks. You know a person's sex 99% of the time by looking at a person. Sex matters, gender is bollocks.

No thank you. I consider gender irrelevant while sex determines how and why women discriminated against at work.

No

Correction: *are discriminated against at work.

From an employers point of view, Wherever there are shared loos, sex should be the deciding factor. Anything else alienates 99% of the workforce and causes ill feeling between employees. They become a nightmare to manage, accusations flying back and forth, Labour relations deteriorate, all too much hassle.

As Robin has never suffered any discrimination based on Robin's sexual reproduction role, Robin has as much right to pontificate about this ,as a white middle class man would talking about racism.

How does this work for pregnant employees and new mothers?

It’s all just such terrible arguments. Embarrassing it’s a qualified lawyer making them not a high school student. I mean White then argues that social norms like separate toilets, sleeping accommodation and changing facilities are based on gender, not sex.
Really? How long ago did those social norms form? Let’s agree sometime between a few hundred and several 1000 years ago. Was there a strong concept of gender as distinct from sex, or did people see them as the same thing when these norms formed? If you agree people saw them as the same thing, do you really want to try and argue that the norms are actually based on the concept of gender and actual sex was really just seen as a physical manifestation of that concept? That would be bollocks. Sex was seen as the defining distinction between people, and the reason for all of these social norms. Lovely to have a broader concept of gender even if it’s really not been well defined yet anywhere although maybe we will get to that point, but it is absolutely not the basis of the social norms which have distinguished women, including in the workforce. I mean really, my grandma didn’t have a secret engagement because she identified as a woman and that’s why she would have lost her job if they knew she was engaged.

@TheWeeDonkey

How does this work for pregnant employees and new mothers?

It’s really just shockingly naive of these women to identify as pregnant knowing the discrimination that frequently attracts. When will women learn??

No.

Robin occasionally tries their luck here. Their sophistry is always pointed out and they are handed their derriere. In fairness it is hard to push nonsense without the backing of #nobebate.

Clearly Robin has never experienced the realities of being female in the workplace. Not the kind of 'femaleness' that one can put on and off like a costume but the kind that comes with menstruation, pregnancy, the 'mummy track', the pay gap, mediocre males talking over exceptional women, mediocre males prioritising females for their tits not their talents, menopausal issues. Clearly Robin doesn't have a fucking clue, which is unsurprising after a lifetime of male privilege.

Of course Robin argues gender is more important than sex, Robin will never have faced the discrimination women face on account of pregnancy, maternity etc.

'No' is my answer to the question posed in the title. No justification needed.

@334bu

As Robin has never suffered any discrimination based on Robin's sexual reproduction role, Robin has as much right to pontificate about this ,as a white middle class man would talking about racism.

ah ha that answers my earlier question.

This article in a nut shell really demonstrates how unsimilar a woman's experience and a transwoman's experience really is. And why women, when describing what it is to be a woman always use our biology and socialisation based off that biology and treatment by others based off that biology as the way we know we are women. Nothing to do with what clothes we wear or make up or shopping which seems to me is what the female "gender" seems to be

No

No

And no

Robin defines sex as a 'physiological characteristic', and gender as 'the social norms or forms associated with males or females.' Robin then goes on to say that in the workplace, sex is not important. Rather, gender is.

I work in a STEM environment. Many people here have been working tirelessly to debunk the "social norm" that Maths and Physics are not for girls. Also that academics should be white and male. Or that science is for quiet, geeky types. Luckily we have lots of female students from a country where these "social norms" do not apply (China). Robin's regressive gender stereotypes are not welcome in this workplace, thank you.

Sleeping arrangements are based on the biological reality that half of the human race can potentially get pregnant, and the other half does the impregnating. Some research in my workplace has suggested that girls of Asian origin are reluctant to apply for university courses such as Geology, as they are under the impression that there will be a lot of field trips with camping, which presents practical/cultural concerns for them. Outreach teams here are working hard to address these (valid) concerns so all degree subjects are open and appealing to everyone. Then Robin pops up to bleat that sleeping arrangements don't need to be single sex, and that really women are being very unreasonable. Thanks a lot Robin!